Is Astral Projection Real?

As I read the comments I keep coming back to the same thing... these are people that have obviously never experienced an OBE. You can try to use big words until you wear your Thesaurus thin, it doesn't make you a scientist or your viewpionts any more valid than the next persons. Personal experience trumps all else. And since truth is as subjective as those experiences, nothing we say here matters.

Even if science did some day say "we have the answer", I wouldn't automatically yield to it. Even many of our so called "laws", I wonder if they really apply 100% of the time. There would be places in our universe (or elsewhere) where things don't react in the same manner as they do in our neck of the cosmos. That is an example of the closemindedness that comes along with science that I have a problem with. Then as more information comes along... information that may contradict previous findings, these mens egos are too thick to acknowledge it and admit that they were wrong. Ego and science seem mutually exclusive, and that's what makes it fallible by nature. And this attitude comes across strongly in Summerlander's rantings. Coincidence?... I think not.

At the risk of being boring I will go back to my view that projection is real in any sense of the world BUT it might not be the event that you think or want or believe it to be.

Its all back to the where does it happen, internal or external to your mind. If this is solved to the satisfaction of everyone then the rest will follow easily.

Peter wrote: At the risk of being boring I will go back to my view that projection is real in any sense of the world BUT it might not be the event that you think or want or believe it to be.

Its all back to the where does it happen, internal or external to your mind. If this is solved to the satisfaction of everyone then the rest will follow easily.

I think that sums up my opinion on the matter. Some of my experiences with lucid dreaming and OBE are just as real as my waking life experiences so for me it not a matter of if these experiences take place, but rather where these experiences take place. Other dimensions/universes may exist and it may be possible to go there without your physical body. If these places do exist outside the dimension of our physical world, I remain unconvinced that it is possible to connect the two, IE. astral project and interact with our physical world. Of course I keep an open mind and I will conduct my own non-scientific experiments. If I am ever able to do (and more than once) that will be enough proof for me.

Don't bash Summerlander, he is just trying to uphold the scientific method. With (I must admit) extremely verbose language. (I can't read all that and I won't try)

When it comes to US in this forum, not being scientists, and not under laboratory conditions, anecdotal evidence must be permissible.

Take it or leave it. But that's the best we can do.

I have no problem with the scientific method but in my simple world I say do not talk about the process just get the results and let them speak.

Its been a good thread

[quote="HAGART"]Don't bash Summerlander, he is just trying to uphold the scientific method. With (I must admit) extremely verbose language. (I can't read all that and I won't try)

When it comes to US in this forum, not being scientists, and not under laboratory conditions, anecdotal evidence must be permissible.

Take it or leave it. But that's the best we can do.[/quote]

Sorry, I'm new here. I didn't know that he/she was allowed to openly talk down condescendingly to other people without any fear of rebuttal. I will adjust my demeanor accordingly.

And if you claim not to get that from their posts I wonder how objective and honest you're really being.

Let's do some science here, to achieve an OBE, can it be any time of day, or does it help to do it during your REM cycle?

To ESPer:

Perhaps I have grown accustomed to Summerlander's antics and the way he talks down to others who don't view things his way. I let it roll of my back, but I can see how you have every right to be annoyed. And if you have a good comeback that puts him in his place, I'm all for that!

Lol! Thanks for that, Hagart! :-D

It is true that science does not have all the answers. But to shoot it down is a bit hypocritical when it has done so much for us. Also, to use a "God of the Gaps-like" argument to justify the existence of an astral realm is extremely weak. There are many theories for the things we can't yet explain that don't involve the supernatural. Especially when we speculate about what might be going on in another neck of the cosmic woods. Lol!

Surely, the astral scenario should be the last claim rather than the first...

[ Post made via Android ] Image

HAGART wrote: To ESPer:

Perhaps I have grown accustomed to Summerlander's antics and the way he talks down to others who don't view things his way. I let it roll of my back, but I can see how you have every right to be annoyed. And if you have a good comeback that puts him in his place, I'm all for that!

I feel exactly the same way haha. I almost posted something similar but I couldn't word it right! And I don't even really agree with him and I can say this so I'd say I'm being objective and honest enough.

[ Post made via iPhone ] Image

LucidLink wrote:

HAGART wrote:To ESPer:

Perhaps I have grown accustomed to Summerlander's antics and the way he talks down to others who don't view things his way. I let it roll of my back, but I can see how you have every right to be annoyed. And if you have a good comeback that puts him in his place, I'm all for that!

I feel exactly the same way haha. I almost posted something similar but I couldn't word it right! And I don't even really agree with him and I can say this so I'd say I'm being objective and honest enough.

[ Post made via iPhone ] Image

I think a lot of us are tired of being talked down to and honestly I don't even bother reading the dissertations any more. Most of them could be edited down to around 3 or 4 sentences max. Those who feel they are being talked down to, insulted, etc. should complain to the moderator as I have done.

On the subject: While I'm interested in Astral Projection, it isn't science at this point because so far it has not been demonstrated by reproducible experiments and it does not have a theory to accompany the experimental evidence. So as far as the science goes, that is really ALL that needs to said. I am interested in setting up my own experiments, but not to further science, just to satisfy my own curiosity.

Suit yourself, lucid. Let us know when you have proof that astral projection is real. As for your dislike of science,...well, perhaps this forum is not for you.

Good luck with your experiments, though! ;-)

[ Post made via Android ] Image

Summerlander wrote: As for your dislike of science,...well, perhaps this forum is not for you.

Another one of your typical mischaracterizations. Nowhere in my post did I indicate ANY dislike for science. So I have to correct you. Please get your facts straight before posting.

And by the way, as far as I know, I was the first person to suggest this forum be added in the first place. :D

My post can be found in the suggestion box dated Jul 8 2013 along with Rebecca's approval.

lucidinthe sky wrote:

Summerlander wrote:As for your dislike of science,...well, perhaps this forum is not for you.

Another one of your typical mischaracterizations. Nowhere in my post did I indicate ANY dislike for science. So I have to correct you. Please get your facts straight before posting.

And by the way, as far as I know, I was the first person to suggest this forum be added in the first place. :D

My post can be found in the suggestion box dated Jul 8 2013 along with Rebecca's approval.

This is the problem of only saying Lucid only as a name, that comment wasnt even directed at you it was directed at me haha

[ Post made via iPhone ] Image

And he's pretty much right, although it's not completely a dislike for science. Because I mean lets face it, science is great. It has to a lot of answers and has helped us a lot, I used to be more of a man of science myself actually.

The problem is, science dosnt deserve all my faith anymore. I'm not gonna doubt something I personally believe in just because science can't prove it. Because I fully believe science may even prove it someday, so just because science can't prove it isn't enough for me. So I suppose summer lander is right maybe this section of the forum isn't for me.

Please get your facts straight before posting, lucidinthesky. :-D

[ Post made via Android ] Image

I wrote my own 'dissertation', but it's my argument to Summerlander to prove that there is at least a shadow of a doubt and we can't close the case on this just yet. And as I write in the end, I don't mind if my argument gets torn to shreds. I like these talks.

My hypothesis is that Astral Projection is just another form of lucid dream. But I still have 1% doubt and I want to try and use science to explain it. I am not that well informed, but bare with me, and I am just banging out ideas, so read the whole thing before dwelling on any specifics.

I think I may have an argument to uphold my agnostic (wishy-washy) view on this subject. Perhaps it is not such a weak one after all. However, I feel I need a PHD to truly be well informed, and make a powerful case, but that could take a while. ;) It is still my hypothesis that Astral Projection is just another form of a lucid dream with a different name no matter how real it seems and how life-like the people you meet. But there is still a shadow of a doubt, and I want to explain why.

I did a little bit of research, (bare with me, I am no physicist), but there is a debate about whether atoms are particles or waves. What if they really are just waves? (Our view of reality gets turned on it's head sometimes, so I must say it is a possibility, so for the case of this argument I will imagine they are.) After all, without waves, we would not perceive anything at all. Waves give us information for our brains to decode and construct our version of reality. Maybe solid objects aren't as solid as we think they are. We can't pass our fingers through solids because our bodies are composed of 'solid' waves too. Perhaps EVERYTHING is a wave, not just sound and light, but matter too. But consciousness and perception is different (brain waves) than our physical, solid, body waves, so our reality and perception of it goes beyond 'physical' matter and what our bodies are limited to.

Waves come in many forms, and another biggie, that is all around us, are electro-magnetic waves. Visible light is one of them, and is a big part of our reality. (Not blind people, but even they detect other waves, like compression waves (sound), and matter (if it is a wave)). For me, being a person of sight, seeing is believing, and is a big part of my brain's construct of my reality as I know it. Other animals like a Bumble Bee can perceive ultra-violet. That's just another light wave on the border of perceivable light waves, that we humans have become so accustomed to detecting with the organ we call eyes, that to see anything else would be abnormal. If you were a human with a mutated gene with a different pair of eyes, you could perceive ultra-violet too. There is a very fine line between the waves out there, and what we actually perceive. If you go beyond the ultra-violet, perhaps there are other realities existing on different wavelengths, (and just as 'solid'), and we are not familiar with them, using our 'normal' human perception.

Is it possible to detect and translate these other waves with our brain without the need to use our eyes and could it happen in altered states of consciousness and perception? It may be possible since other waves like radio waves for example in the spectrum pass through our physical bodies. It may be possible that some of these waves (perhaps some even unknown to use as of yet) influence our brains. Our brains' thoughts are electrical currents, so who knows how these other electro-magnetic waves may influence it. The same way they affect other electrical and magnetic fields outside our body they may influence our actual brains and in turn our thoughts and perception. Our brains are engineered to create a working reality from simple waves we perceive when awake. That's what it does best, so maybe they do the same thing when asleep, and in a different brain wave pattern, like the Theta wave, they translate whatever it can find and since it is not coming from our eyes, ears, or other senses, it comes from somewhere else. External waves that bounce all around us, but we never notice when awake, but our 'thinking machine' picks up on them without that 'waking noise' that we detect when awake.

What can appear as just a wave that has no influence on waking-perception-reality, may be a solid object in a different level of reality that exists in a different band width of electro-magneticism, and an altered state of perception from our bandwidth may be able to 'tune in' to the others. Hence, a different 'reality' may exist, and perhaps even possible to perceive with the human brain. ( I put it in quotes because when I think about this too much, I don't know how to define 'reality' anymore ).

The best way to prove it is to use a machine. And since that hasn't been done yet, and I must say, I have never had an astral projection (as I have defined it earlier), there is only 1% of me that thinks it is possible, but I don't feel like I have a weak argument for that 1% doubt. It's hard to prove since there are no quotes from great thinkers to support me. None that I know of anyway.

I admit I am using a lot of 'what if' scenarios, but scientific break-throughs usually start that way. I don't mind feed back from Summerlander no matter how you choose to word it. I am just talking off the cuff, unrehearsed, and have similar conversations with people face to face. When we speak on a forum like this, I feel like I need to word it just right because it's typed and becomes recorded for all to see, and I can't clarify it right away, but when I speak in real time, I don't care if I don't get it right the first time. So even I don't take everything I said too seriously. I like talks like this!

Rip my argument to shreds so I can rebuild it! :D Normally they get torn down halfway through, so I am use to that.

^^^ The Hagart theory.

You put a lot of effort into that, I read it and I have no debunks for it, would be so interesting if that does prove to be reality.

HAGART wrote: I wrote my own 'dissertation', but it's my argument to Summerlander to prove that there is at least a shadow of a doubt and we can't close the case on this just yet. And as I write in the end, I don't mind if my argument gets torn to shreds. I like these talks.

My hypothesis is that Astral Projection is just another form of lucid dream. But I still have 1% doubt and I want to try and use science to explain it. I am not that well informed, but bare with me, and I am just banging out ideas, so read the whole thing before dwelling on any specifics.

I think I may have an argument to uphold my agnostic (wishy-washy) view on this subject. Perhaps it is not such a weak one after all. However, I feel I need a PHD to truly be well informed, and make a powerful case, but that could take a while. ;) It is still my hypothesis that Astral Projection is just another form of a lucid dream with a different name no matter how real it seems and how life-like the people you meet. But there is still a shadow of a doubt, and I want to explain why.

I did a little bit of research, (bare with me, I am no physicist), but there is a debate about whether atoms are particles or waves. What if they really are just waves? (Our view of reality gets turned on it's head sometimes, so I must say it is a possibility, so for the case of this argument I will imagine they are.) After all, without waves, we would not perceive anything at all. Waves give us information for our brains to decode and construct our version of reality. Maybe solid objects aren't as solid as we think they are. We can't pass our fingers through solids because our bodies are composed of 'solid' waves too. Perhaps EVERYTHING is a wave, not just sound and light, but matter too. But consciousness and perception is different (brain waves) than our physical, solid, body waves, so our reality and perception of it goes beyond 'physical' matter and what our bodies are limited to.

Waves come in many forms, and another biggie, that is all around us, are electro-magnetic waves. Visible light is one of them, and is a big part of our reality. (Not blind people, but even they detect other waves, like compression waves (sound), and matter (if it is a wave)). For me, being a person of sight, seeing is believing, and is a big part of my brain's construct of my reality as I know it. Other animals like a Bumble Bee can perceive ultra-violet. That's just another light wave on the border of perceivable light waves, that we humans have become so accustomed to detecting with the organ we call eyes, that to see anything else would be abnormal. If you were a human with a mutated gene with a different pair of eyes, you could perceive ultra-violet too. There is a very fine line between the waves out there, and what we actually perceive. If you go beyond the ultra-violet, perhaps there are other realities existing on different wavelengths, (and just as 'solid'), and we are not familiar with them, using our 'normal' human perception.

Is it possible to detect and translate these other waves with our brain without the need to use our eyes and could it happen in altered states of consciousness and perception? It may be possible since other waves like radio waves for example in the spectrum pass through our physical bodies. It may be possible that some of these waves (perhaps some even unknown to use as of yet) influence our brains. Our brains' thoughts are electrical currents, so who knows how these other electro-magnetic waves may influence it. The same way they affect other electrical and magnetic fields outside our body they may influence our actual brains and in turn our thoughts and perception. Our brains are engineered to create a working reality from simple waves we perceive when awake. That's what it does best, so maybe they do the same thing when asleep, and in a different brain wave pattern, like the Theta wave, they translate whatever it can find and since it is not coming from our eyes, ears, or other senses, it comes from somewhere else. External waves that bounce all around us, but we never notice when awake, but our 'thinking machine' picks up on them without that 'waking noise' that we detect when awake.

What can appear as just a wave that has no influence on waking-perception-reality, may be a solid object in a different level of reality that exists in a different band width of electro-magneticism, and an altered state of perception from our bandwidth may be able to 'tune in' to the others. Hence, a different 'reality' may exist, and perhaps even possible to perceive with the human brain. ( I put it in quotes because when I think about this too much, I don't know how to define 'reality' anymore ).

The best way to prove it is to use a machine. And since that hasn't been done yet, and I must say, I have never had an astral projection (as I have defined it earlier), there is only 1% of me that thinks it is possible, but I don't feel like I have a weak argument for that 1% doubt. It's hard to prove since there are no quotes from great thinkers to support me. None that I know of anyway.

I admit I am using a lot of 'what if' scenarios, but scientific break-throughs usually start that way. I don't mind feed back from Summerlander no matter how you choose to word it. I am just talking off the cuff, unrehearsed, and have similar conversations with people face to face. When we speak on a forum like this, I feel like I need to word it just right because it's typed and becomes recorded for all to see, and I can't clarify it right away, but when I speak in real time, I don't care if I don't get it right the first time. So even I don't take everything I said too seriously. I like talks like this!

Rip my argument to shreds so I can rebuild it! :D Normally they get torn down halfway through, so I am use to that.

Quite a bit to think about there. I'll have to digest it and comment after. :)

HAGART wrote: if you have a good comeback that puts him in his place, I'm all for that!

This was my attempt. It's worth a shot.

Goldkoron wrote: ^^^ The Hagart theory.

You put a lot of effort into that, I read it and I have no debunks for it, would be so interesting if that does prove to be reality.

I'm sure there are holes in 'The Hagart Theory' and it can be debunked. Let's see how this goes.... I change my opinion all the time when I get new information.

And to Lucid in the Sky: That must be the record for the longest quote box to shortest response ratio in the history of all forums...! :lol: I think we broke a record here today!

Hi, Hagart! I'm not here to rip people's posts to shreds. I'm also no physicist either (although I have read a lot of material by Stephen Hawking, Brian Cox, Lawrence Krauss and Feynman).

It's true that on microscopic scales matter can be both wave and particle and classical common sense goes out the window. We need a quantum theory of gravity. You may like to read jim Baggot's "A Quantum Story" to see how science arrived at such conclusions and how scientists wrestled with quantum physics.

I will keep this short so we don't digress from the astral projection topic again. Science does not have all the answers and the brain is indeed a poor tool with which we perceive reality (although technology ay help us on this respect).

I've got nothing against people leaving the door open to astral projection. I just find the idea highly improbable and tend not to jump the gun about things in nature that we can't yet explain.

As far as I can tell, there is only dream consciousness which people interpret in different ways.

[ Post made via Android ] Image

Sorry for the delay ahaha I don’t have much time to make these kind of big texts

Answer to summerlander:

Summerlander:‘’I never said science explains everything’’

If you read the two phrases I quote from you, you can see that we can extract two opposite conclusions out of them: A: I don’t know if Astral projection is impossible B: ‘’We can safely say they are not there’’ = Astral projection is impossible

‘’ there is a difference between saying something is impossible (which I have not said) and saying something is not happening according to the evidence’’ If you were trying to say a different thing, that’s ok, it was a language problem…If you read your answer you have to admit that was a logical conclusion. I only wanted to clarify you position about the proposition ‘’ Astral projection is impossible’’ and seems to me that you agree with me, although you are not so septic like me and you still believe, at least unconsciously (I don’t know xDD) that science is absolute truth. When we argue rationally you accept my view, but probably you don’t want to believe it.

Or I’m interpreting you wrong and when you say that science does not explains everything you mean that, at the moment does not explain everything, but has the capacity for doing it in time and produces truth. And I disagree, because, you can´t know about it’s absolute truth. I’m referring empirical sciences - I’m excluding Mathematics (or at least, part of it). That would be other level of discussion and don’t have time or knowledge to go there.

Regarding what Brutal said:

Never mind, he can explain what he said, I’m not sure. I think when he said ‘’holy doctrine’ he was referring to the most important laws (like the laws of physics) and not to a bible or something dogmatic as that. (supposing the laws of physics are not). If you want to address my anti-verificacionism, ok, as you wish. That was what I supposed Brutal was trying to say.

Summerlander:’' if it was there, we would have found it by now’’

I continue to disagree. 1000 ears in the future you will probably be telling the same about 2013 – the time when we knew nothing about the nature of reality and could not predict a thing.

‘’No. The observation that one has never been seen to fly may lead to the a priori deduction’’

Yes that would not be enough to say he could not fly, I did not say that. I agree that he as the burden of proof and we should not believe him and you agree that we can´t say it’s impossible even if he does not present proof – case closed

‘’As for the assumption that the rules of the game are constant, I don't really get it?’’

What I was trying to say was: we don’t know if the laws of empirical science are truth because we are making inductions base on the observable.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_induction

‘Hume called this the principle uniformity of nature’’. If the natural laws are not constant the laws of physics are not true. I would agree with if you say that they are true if the period of uniformity. If the nature changes we would find a new set of laws. It depends of your epistemological interpretation of the laws of physics. If you say x always occurs, I would disagree. If you said ‘’x always occurs’’ if the current frame of nature reality, I agree. Imagine for example, for instance, that laws of nature change in every 12323 gazillion ears xD.

Although, Popper solved the problem of induction, saying that scientist don’t really do that…but well, that's leave that for now. If you want to talk about ti, that's ok

**‘’we'd digress again and Peter wouldn't like ‘ **

If someone asks if A exists, I think is not digressing to talk about epistemology

’‘’its own biological version of sonar’’

I must ‘’deduce’’ that when we dream about a mountain, she is really there physically xDD

‘’ Again, I would use my reasoning above against this unproductive and unproven solipsism’

I did not say that solipsism is true. We have no knowable way to prove anti-realism, but we are in the same situation about realism.

‘’ then we have no choice but to play with it and our knowledge is based on how this illusion works. So, we still know something’’

I agree if you say that the scientific laws don’t depend on the existence of the entities they are referring. This depends of your definition of existence also. We would know scientific laws inside the illusion, yes. It seems that our problem always leads to the epistemological interpretation.

Summerland:‘’They exude an air of consciousness according to our observations. This is the evidence we have which makes solipsism seem absurd. You are only talking to me, because, like me, you have developed a theory of mind.’’

You are saying you believe that the people in your dreams exist? I must infer that.

Conclusion:

The scientific method is the only decent way of justified belief that is known I guess, so we must use it, but never trust in it like absolute, at the point of saying things are impossible and you agree, so….

Just an interesting question for you: ‘’And If what we see in a telescope is not really the right image?’’

HAGART wrote:

Rip my argument to shreds so I can rebuild it! :D Normally they get torn down halfway through, so I am use to that.

That's the spirit man :D Interesting hypothesis you made

Just to bring more data to the table I want to discuss some things of Hagart's hypothesis

Hagart:‘’After all, without waves, we would not perceive anything at all’’

It’s interesting, but if you think well, that also applies if you consider that there atoms and not waves. Because, by a scientific approach, we have to admit that color it’s a phenomenon that happens in our brain…is not a property of the exterior object, if there is one. So, what you are seeing is not the real object, but a brain characterization of waves. Even the image that we have from an atom is tricky, because they are not balls. We cannot perceive pure reality if that exists, because we have to filter something. Just the notion of perceiving pure reality seems to contradict itself. Because the word perceive let us think that is not pure reality. It’s hard even to think of what is pure reality, because your brain has to make an image of it, that comes in memories, perception, etc.

If you say we would not perceive anything at all, I guess it’s wrong, because we would ‘’perceive’’ the wave in other form

The notion of reality gets really tricky, I agree and have to think about that. The implications of your hypothesis have to be thought about.

At a first look on your hypothesis, it seems also that it would have to redefine the notion of astral projection I think. You make a contradiction, because when we talk about astral projection I assume that we are referring to a interactions with the ‘’real’’ world. But with hypothesis there are no ‘’real’’, the other frequencies are just equivalent to our frequency. I don’t know, this came across my mind.

Thinker wrote: We cannot perceive pure reality if that exists, because we have to filter something.

Yea, our brains are like filters. Imagine a room full of people talking. You can hear them all, but it's hard to discern them all. Then if you change your attention and focus around the room and tune in to each of the conversations individually, (Filtering compression waves), you can block out the other noises mentally and understand each of the conversations one at time. (Provided the room is not too large, and the number of talkers is limited. It's impossible in a crowded stadium for our feeble human minds).

And without any compression waves you would not hear anything at all. No waves; nothing for the brain to interpret. But the brain keeps doing it anyway and simply can't stop. Look at Lucid in the Sky's post about hearing voices during HI. I get that too sometimes and am hearing other reports about it. It sounds like hearing a group of people talking from another room or on a radio and it's hard to discern what they are saying. But as I fall deeper into a dream state, the voices start to make more sense to me and I can 'tune in' to them. (Where they are coming from is still debatable, and I don't know). But it goes to show that the brain just can't stop creating and processing even in the absence of known external waves to pick up through our senses. (They could be coming from within too). But it's a known fact that people tend to hallucinate during sensory deprivation, because our minds just keep going and don't turn off.

I've never seen an atom before, so I really don't know what they are. They don't have to be a wave to be detected by our brains, but merely reflect waves. (So saying this means, even I am not in love with my theory and it's just an idea.) Chemistry and physics work mathematically, and that's really all scientist know about reality. It's all calculable cause and effect. The difference between blue and red and all the colors in between are just numbers and equations. But we perceive them through our brain's filter and make them 'beautiful'.

And I also wonder about the sense of smell. Apparently we detect minute particles and odors are not carried by a wave. This would go against what I said: "Without waves we wouldn't perceive anything". OR.... it may mean that particles really are waves after all......

I really don't know! Just having deep thoughts. :ugeek: This all relates to the possibility of Astral Projection as I defined it earlier, but it can also relate to Remote Viewing or "interactions with the 'real' world" too. They go hand in hand.

To Thinker: And why would it not be the right image, mon cherie?

I won't waste time with the epistemological debate, guys, but I will leave you all with a quote to ponder on:

"The universe is far stranger and far richer - more wondrously strange - than our meagre human imaginations can anticipate. Modern cosmology has driven us to consider ideas that could not even have been formulated a century ago. The great discoveries of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries have not only changed the world in which we operate, they have revolutionized our understanding of the world - or worlds - that exist, or may exist, just under our noses: the reality that lies hidden until we are brave enough to search for it. This is why philosophy and theology are ultimately incapable of addressing by themselves the truly fundamental questions that perplex us about our existence. Until we open our eyes and let nature call the shots, we are bound to wallow in myopia."

-Lawrence Krauss

Science isn't about lingering and holding on to unproductive "what if" questions from our imagination. It is about an exciting voyage of discovery that may reveal how the universe works. We have already learned an awful lot about its evolution. B-)

[ Post made via Android ] Image

HAGART wrote:

Thinker wrote:We cannot perceive pure reality if that exists, because we have to filter something.

Yea, our brains are like filters. Imagine a room full of people talking. You can hear them all, but it's hard to discern them all. Then if you change your attention and focus around the room and tune in to each of the conversations individually, (Filtering compression waves), you can block out the other noises mentally and understand each of the conversations one at time. (Provided the room is not too large, and the number of talkers is limited. It's impossible in a crowded stadium for our feeble human minds).

And without any compression waves you would not hear anything at all. No waves; nothing for the brain to interpret. But the brain keeps doing it anyway and simply can't stop. Look at Lucid in the Sky's post about hearing voices during HI. I get that too sometimes and am hearing other reports about it. It sounds like hearing a group of people talking from another room or on a radio and it's hard to discern what they are saying. But as I fall deeper into a dream state, the voices start to make more sense to me and I can 'tune in' to them. (Where they are coming from is still debatable, and I don't know). But it goes to show that the brain just can't stop creating and processing even in the absence of known external waves to pick up through our senses. (They could be coming from within too). But it's a known fact that people tend to hallucinate during sensory deprivation, because our minds just keep going and don't turn off.

I've never seen an atom before, so I really don't know what they are. They don't have to be a wave to be detected by our brains, but merely reflect waves. (So saying this means, even I am not in love with my theory and it's just an idea.) Chemistry and physics work mathematically, and that's really all scientist know about reality. It's all calculable cause and effect. The difference between blue and red and all the colors in between are just numbers and equations. But we perceive them through our brain's filter and make them 'beautiful'.

And I also wonder about the sense of smell. Apparently we detect minute particles and odors are not carried by a wave. This would go against what I said: "Without waves we wouldn't perceive anything". OR.... it may mean that particles really are waves after all......

I really don't know! Just having deep thoughts. :ugeek: This all relates to the possibility of Astral Projection as I defined it earlier, but it can also relate to Remote Viewing or "interactions with the 'real' world" too. They go hand in hand.

''But it's a known fact that people tend to hallucinate during sensory deprivation, because our minds just keep going and don't turn off. ''

You reminded me about this: http://www.cracked.com/article/127_5-ways-to-hack-your-brain-into-awesomeness/

Funny article. The way is wiritten makes you laugh. See #4.Hallucinate Like You Just Took LSD, Legally I don't know if you already knew this. I want to try that, but I'm a bit afraid : D

You also reminded me of a experiment that was made with a person inside a room with aboslutely no sound. The result is that humans cannot be more than several minutes in that situation. They start to vomit and collapsing (something smiliar to this)

Yes, if atoms are waves, your nose (don't know were it is) would detect the waves

Summerlander wrote: To Thinker: And why would it not be the right image, mon cherie?

I won't waste time with the epistemological debate, guys, but I will leave you all with a quote to ponder on:

"The universe is far stranger and far richer - more wondrously strange - than our meagre human imaginations can anticipate. Modern cosmology has driven us to consider ideas that could not even have been formulated a century ago. The great discoveries of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries have not only changed the world in which we operate, they have revolutionized our understanding of the world - or worlds - that exist, or may exist, just under our noses: the reality that lies hidden until we are brave enough to search for it. This is why philosophy and theology are ultimately incapable of addressing by themselves the truly fundamental questions that perplex us about our existence. Until we open our eyes and let nature call the shots, we are bound to wallow in myopia."

-Lawrence Krauss

Science isn't about lingering and holding on to unproductive "what if" questions from our imagination. It is about an exciting voyage of discovery that may reveal how the universe works. We have already learned an awful lot about its evolution. B-)

[ Post made via Android ] Image

I suppose we have reasonable doubt. I ask you the same...why would it be the right image? I'm not claiming the opposite, I'm just saying you have no proof. The burden of proof, :D

I could give you thousands:

Image

It would be the right image because light from those distant objects in space reach us. It would be, of course, an image made by our brains but still contrained by sensory input. In other words, those photons would still have travelled through space and reached our eyes all according to the laws of nature. Hence, that is why it would be the "right" image according to the impact such signals from space have had on our brains. You would see that image every time you looked through the telescope. The mental model constrained by external influence, and, I might add, the product of both object and our make-up. It's an interpretation of what is going on out there, it's what the brain does. Now, if you see Mickey Mouse when you point your telescope at Andromeda and I see a galaxy then you need to have your head checked. ;-)

Again, I will pose the question to you, Thinker: Why would it not be the right image? Are you suggesting that the supernatural could be taking place? Again, an argument that ignores evidence and the burden of proof. We have plenty of evidence that our universe follows a natural order and none forthe preternatural or miracles.

Here's another one of my favourite quotes (this one is old but somewhat applicable! LoL):

"Human understanding has made it certain that two and one make three; and that one is not three; nor can three be one... Miracles or Prophecies might frighten us out of our Witts; might scare us to death; might induce Us to lie; to say that we believe that 2+2 make 5. But we should not believe it. We should know the contrary." - John Adams

John Adams...

[ Post made via Android ] Image

Oh, and about 'your' illusion there...

Science isn't about making conclusions or establishing truths out of illusions or first appearances. A scientist wouldn't just merely look at the lines and say that one is longer than the other. He would get a ruler out and measure them both, thus arriving at the fact that they are both the same size. Science doesn't even take consciousness for granted, it has even considered the possibility that even this one could be a very elaborate illusion.

We also know that none of the atoms or molecules that constitute water are wet, and yet, the substance appears to have that property... B-)

[ Post made via Android ] Image

On dreaming...

While I'm non-lucid, absolutely! I assume that dream characters are real people because I don't even know I'm dreaming and many of my mental faculties are inoperable. However, once I become lucid (i.e. Know that I'm dreaming) I am able to control or transmute any apparent sentient being in the dream environment. I can mould things with my mind in the dream world hence all in my head.

Needless to say, the same does not happen when I'm awake and dealing with real people. Hence I infer that they are objectively real and most likely conscious as I am (theory of mind).

Astral projection believers, however, may believe that dream characters are real discarnate beings in some astral plane, and, instead of scepticism or due logic in the situation of being awake in a dream world, they have belief and assumption which will cause them to dismiss the test of control and transmutation and only add fuel to the fire...or, in this case, project their expectations onto their mental clay and willingly delude themselves.

Hence why I say that that lucid dreaming isthe superior form of that hybrid state of mind. When you "lucid dream" you recognise it for what it truly is and you can get so much more out of the experience. When you say you "OOBE" or "astral project," you are only limiting and deluding yourself - not to mention that such beliefs were devised by people who knew less or were deliberately

[ Post made via Android ] Image

HAGART wrote: This is an intervention for Summerlander. :lol:

"We all love you and are trying to help". "You're addicted to bad derogatory wording." "One step at a time.... baby steps.... we can get through this", says Mr. Therapist.

Your opinion DOES matter, but the WORDING of it puts people off.

I crack jokes to make light of this, but there is seriousness in humour. :|

You are a wise person, and might I add, one of the kindest people on this forum. :D *

• this smile is a non-sarcastic smile and has been used to indicate that poster genuinely approves of the quoted comments.

I thought about this some more and I think Summerlander uses this site sometimes just to vent his frustrations. There are some views from others I disagree with, but I just keep it to myself and words on a page rarely persuade anybody anyway.

Other times Summerlander is very informative and funny, and a joy to hear from.

But if he truly wants to persuade people to take notice and learn, 'you catch more flies with honey than vinegar'. The choice is his and his alone, but then again he has no free will and doesn't believe in that. ;)

HAGART wrote: ...but then again he has no free will.... ;)

Oh shit! I forgot about that. I think we are doomed. :)

He is an automaton sent from the future just to troll us...

Automatons have no free will, but we humans do. Albeit... to a degree. I do like the 'free will' argument, but that's for another day.

(Crack a joke... get serious... you know my routine).

Yes, that is true. And automaton from the future with no free will. Also, a very opinionated one too.

There is plenty of time to have no opinions and to be silent when this automaton stops working for good.

[ Post made via Android ] Image

What a nice end to a crazy debate:)

I stepped out a while ago because I realized I was always gonna believe in astral projection and others weren't and that's that, but I always kept up with the thread.

And now I see this thread has gone far beyond beliefs, we've gotten right down to the nitty gritty of human nature!

Interesting topic, great debate and no one wins! Hurrah!:)

[ Post made via iPhone ] Image

That's true. Great debate.

[ Post made via Android ] Image

HAGART wrote: He is an automaton sent from the future just to troll us...

Automatons have no free will, but we humans do. Albeit... to a degree. I do like the 'free will' argument, but that's for another day.

(Crack a joke... get serious... you know my routine).

I did not see the rest of the discussion after I left, but...this cannot end here Do you believe in free will? Discussion reborn!! :D

Well, I don't. I think it's an incoherent concept. On a classical level, the universe is deterministic, it follows cause and effect and we are a part of such construct. Not even quantum mechanics, with its probability framework, escapes determinism kick-started since the Big Bang.

In fact, even if one posits the existence of a soul, the notion of free will is still incompatible. The soul's urges to do something are just as mysterious and certainly dependable on what happens environmentally and how one feels about it. Likewise, a soul is also no explanation for a life force or consciousness. One would also have to ask how is a soul conscious? It does not even begin to address the problem.

So, you are as free to decide your next move as you are free to decide what card you will play next. The decision-outcome is constrained by the rules of the game, how things pan out, how one feels about how the game is going, and, of course, the hand that one has been given (which one did not pick).

You did not pick your genome, your gender, your family, what happens to you, or what country you are born. All of these things are beyond your control and you merely behave accordingly because all that you are is atoms and molecules following cause and effect. Free will is an illusion.

Someone who is a manic depressive cannot help this, due to his brain states, and this may lead to his decision to end his life. But this is not a decision from free will. It is an urge that one could not help. Brain states dictate that the will to die is stronger than the will to live in this case. We have will, but it isn't free.

As neuroscientist Sam Harris once put it: "You can decide what you decide but you cannot decide what you will decide."

As the late intellectual Christopher Hitchens once quipped: "Yes, we have free will...because we have no choice." :mrgreen:

I think free will is an illusion. The best we can do is have will power. We can choose to do something unpleasurable now, knowing it will have benefits in the future. Like quitting addictions or dieting. So if you do quit and change your life, you feel good and consider it something you did by sheer free will. But that was just will power. There's a difference.

In actuality all matter and energy moves in predictable ways, so I think my entire life could have been predicted. And since my brain matter is matter too, all my choices as well. To predict it, it would require a hypothetical super computer that knows the placement of every atom and it's energy and movement ect. in the entire galaxy, but I think everything is unfolding as it should in a predictable way. It's just way too much for our meager minds to comprehend.

EDIT: I'll add this. I only realized it later, but I hope all agree: This is starting to go off on a completely other path. WE SHOULD ALL AGREE TO LOCK THIS THREAD. (Start a new one about astral projection anytime, but this one's cooked).

Many people will find it hard to accept that there is no free will because it makes judicial punishment, or any form of punishment for that matter, seem immoral. Despite our attachment to the erroneous notion of free will, most of us are well aware of the fact that brain disorders alone can trump our best intentions in mind. Sam Harris said it well in his "Free Will" thesis:

"Without free will, sinners and criminals would be nothing more than poorly calibrated clockwork, and any conception of justice that emphasized punishing them (rather than deterring, rehabilitating, or merely containing them) would appear utterly incongruous. And those of us who work hard and follow the rules would not 'deserve' our success in any deep sense. It is not an accident that most people find these conclusions abhorrent. The stakes are high."

"Free will is an illusion. Our wills are simply not of our own making. Thoughts and intentions emerge from background causes of which we are unaware and over which we exert no conscious control. We do not have the freedom we think we have."

Not only are we not the conscious source of our thoughts and actions in the present, we also would have behaved exactly the same as we did in the past, contrary to popular belief and no matter how much we may regret certain actions. If we went back in time and adopted the exact same original brain states that corresponded to the past actions we would have behaved no different and would have felt exactly the same as we did.

If, however, we went back in time with the neurophisiology that we possess at present (the one that has the regretful memory of certain past events) we would indeed be able to act differently. But not because of free will. Because we would have brain states with extra experience and thus capable of using that as a point of reference - and provided that we remember those past events too. Recalling, as everyone knows, doesn't happen when we want it to.

Furthermore, science comes in with experiments such as that of Benjamin Libet's. An EEG showed activity in the brain's motor cortex arising 300 milliseconds before a person feels that he has decided to move. Other labs extended the experiment using functional magnetic resonance imaging. In Free will, the experiment is described as follows:

"Subjects were asked to press one of two buttons while watching a 'clock' composed of a random sequence of letters appearing on a screen. They reported which letter was visible at the moment they decided to press one button or the other. The experimenters found two brain regions that contained information about which button subjects would press a full 7 to 10 seconds before the decision was consciously made. More recently, direct recordings from the cortex showed that the activity of merely 256 neurons was sufficient to predict with 80% accuracy a person's decision to move 700 milliseconds before he became aware of it."

I would even argue that even if cerebral activity happened at the same time as the conscious decision, it would still not give credit to the free will notion for obvious reasons (from cosmological determinism to environmental influences on sentient beings). One might, however, decide that free will, even if illusory, is too strong and too important to discard - as in the compatibilistic view (as opposed to hard determinism). However, I do feel that ignoring facts is not the answer.

Its interesting that you brought up the judicial system because I have thought of this too. Some people break laws, not because they are immoral, but because of their upbringing and social surroundings. If you were abused as a child and taught that violence solves problems and then live in a poor neighborhood infested with drugs, it is natural to be a violent person who sells drugs to make a living. It's human nature and all the atoms that compose bodies and brains will behave and react in the same predictable manner. I would have too and don't feel holier than thow. America's prisons are filled to the brim with these type of people. They need to realize the source of the problem instead of hiding it away in an institution. (This thread now has a life of its own and we should have started a new one).

Then there are other types of criminals that are just sick in the head. You can't fix that with punishment. And neither with the first type I describe. Some call prison 'a college for criminals'. They learn a lot in there. Locking people up doesn't solve any problems and may even exasperate the problem.

Where were we again? Oh yea prisons. No, it was free will. Or was it astral projection? I don't know anymore! We should stop, because I know how annoying it is to see a new, green check mark on an old post I don't care about anymore.

WE SHOULD ALL AGREE TO LOCK THIS THREAD. (Start a new one anytime about astral projection or free will, but this one's cooked).

I like this talk though, so I will make a new topic in the off-topic section about it. Free will has a lot to do with lucid dreaming. We are in a dream and make conscious deliberate decisions. Just copy and paste what you wrote to save time.

Okay! :D

Everyone, you can voice your opinion here: http://www.world-of-lucid-dreaming.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=13858

And to finish here, and more to the point of this thread, let me leave you all with a quote by Michael Raduga from The Phase guidebook:

"There are many reasons to classify lucid dreaming (i.e. dream consciousness) together with out-of-body travel. This is not only because existing research and a massive number of peoples' experiences easily prove it. There are a number of questions that adherents of dividing phase phenomena into various states cannot answer.

First, why do lucid dreamers and out-of-body travellers use the very same techniques to achieve their states, but merely call the result by different names?

Second, why are the fundamental properties of the out-of-body plane and lucid-dreaming world exactly the same?

Third, if the world of dreaming can take on any external form with any properties, then how does one differentiate real exit of the soul from the body into the physical world - or parallel astral one - from a simulated dreamscape? Many can offer theoretical explanations, but not one that can be applied or proven in practice."

For those of you who attempt the argument from the inability to disprove (again ignoring the burden of proof) let me quote from Hermione in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows about the Resurrection Stone:

"How can I possibly prove it doesn't exist? Do you expect me to get hold of - of all the pebbles in the world and test them? I mean, you could claim that anything's real if the only basis for believing in it is that nobody's proved it doesn't exist."

It almost sounds Kantian or Russellian! LoL! Thus I believe we have concluded how valid the astral projection affair is (sarcasm) and how realistic/pragmatic the term lucid dreaming.

[ Post made via Android ] Image

I say again, I believe astral projection is very real my friends ;)

[ Post made via iPhone ] Image

I have always said it is real as we experience it but still say it is not what you believe it to be. If it is you are welcome to find my house and smash a window to show me you can interact with the physical other that just you own body

Peter wrote: I have always said it is real as we experience it but still say it is not what you believe it to be. If it is you are welcome to find my house and smash a window to show me you can interact with the physical other that just you own body

I never thought astral projection was capable of something like that. So we can both agree it is real as we experience it:)

[ Post made via iPhone ] Image

Off course we can :)

[quote="Peter"]I have always said it is real as we experience it but still say it is not what you believe it to be. If it is you are welcome to find my house and smash a window to show me you can interact with the physical other that just you own body[/quote]

I would love to elaborate on my personal beliefs with astral projection, because I have a different definition then many people, and i never thought astral projection was capable of something like that, which shows others do not understand my beliefs. But I know my beliefs will be attacked, so I will keep them to myself.

I'd also like to add, I've never experienced astral projection, only lucid dreams. I still believe:) The astral planes, the 4th dimension, is where we go when we die. Dreams are the "after-life".

Feel free to attack those beliefs and try to brutally assassinate them summerlander :)

[size=75][b][i][ Post made via iPhone ][/i][/b][/size] [img]http://yoursite.com/phpBB3/images/mobile/iPhone.png[/img]